ECSBC 2024 Is Written. Who Enforces It?
This post argues that the Energy Conservation and Sustainable Building Code 2024 (ECSBC 2024) will change buildings only in states that tie the building permit, the completion certificate or the electricity connection to a named checker, and that the evidence now shows an uneven map and not a simple stall. Kerala and Andhra Pradesh have written the code into their rules, while national reviews find the checking machinery thin almost everywhere else.[2][3]
Our brief for this post assumed that adoption was stalling. The sources do not support that as a blanket claim, so we have re-argued it around enforcement. Where a source is a news report and not the rule itself, we say so.
The code applies by connected load, and states decide whether it binds
The Bureau of Energy Efficiency’s ECSBC 2024 is written for commercial and office buildings with a connected load of 100 kW or a contract demand of 120 kVA and above.[1] It extends the earlier ECBC 2017 to cover sustainability topics such as water, waste and indoor environment, and adds optional higher tiers.[1] NITI Aayog adds that it includes voluntary disclosure of embodied carbon in building materials.[2]
A national code does not bind a building until a state makes it so. Kerala’s rules cite the Energy Conservation Act, 2001, under which the Centre prescribes the code and a state government may amend it to suit local conditions and notify it by rules.[4] The record under the earlier code shows how far that gets. NITI counts ECBC notified in 23 states and Union Territories, with 13 yet to notify it. Of the 23, 18 use the 2017 or 2020 version and 5 still use 2007 or 2008.[2] NITI says ECSBC 2024 and the residential Eco Niwas Samhita 2024 were “yet to be adopted by states” at the time of its assessment.[2]
Two states have already written ECSBC into permits, so “nobody has adopted it” is dated
Kerala notified its Energy Conservation and Sustainable Building Code Rules, 2025 on 10 March 2025. They apply to commercial buildings with a connected load of 100 kW or more, or a contract demand of 120 kVA or more.[4] The Hindu reported them as rules under the ECSBC published by the Bureau.[5] Andhra Pradesh issued G.O.Ms.No.273 on 19 December 2025, amending its Building Rules, 2017. The Hindu reported that the amendments include “mandatory adoption” of ECSBC 2024 and ENS 2024, and that integrated compliance now runs from plan approval to the occupancy certificate.[6] TeamLease RegTech’s summary of the order says the codes were adopted as APECSBC and APENS with third-party certification made compulsory for large buildings.[8]
This conflicts with NITI’s statement, which was published in February 2026. The likely reason is the cut-off date of NITI’s assessment, but we cannot tell from the report. We also did not read the Andhra Pradesh order itself, only news and a legal-update summary, so the details of its enforcement steps are unverified. In Kerala’s rules, the “Code” is defined only as the code framed by the Bureau under the Act, with no year given in the definition we read.[4] We therefore do not say which edition Kerala applies.
Kerala’s rules show a full chain from permit to two years of reports
The Kerala rules are the clearest written example we found of a chain that does not end at approval. The local authority may sanction a building plan only after it receives a certificate from an empanelled energy auditor. The permit is conditional on compliance during construction and on the building not being occupied before an occupancy certificate, and it can be revoked on a non-compliance report or a material misrepresentation.[4]
At completion, an energy performance index ratio of one or less against the sanctioned plan counts as compliance. If the ratio is above one, the auditor records the deviation and seeks more measures. The occupancy certificate then carries conditions: the State committee monitors and verifies performance, and the owner submits an energy performance index report to the State Designated Agency for two consecutive years after the building is fully operational. If the ratio stays above one, the authority may issue a provisional occupancy certificate on condition of an energy audit and a three-year window to fix it, and a grievance committee hears owners who miss the target.[4]
Our post on the energy performance index explains the ratio. Our reading is that the second year of reporting is where metered data becomes unavoidable, because the rules ask for the index of a building in operation. The rules do not name a metering method in the sections we read.
Elsewhere the chain has missing links at design check, staffing and sanctions
NITI and ETPI describe the other states in less flattering terms. ETPI found that critical systems for implementing the code were lacking in all the code-notified states among the ten it studied for FY 2023-24. The gaps included ECBC compliance not being built into online building-permission systems, no empanelled professionals to check it, and too few trained staff in urban local bodies.[3] NITI lists the same weaknesses along with manual procedures, too few qualified third-party assessors in some states, and no end-use data to test whether design-stage compliance becomes real savings.[2]
Enforcement also differs in kind. NITI says Punjab uses in-house officials, Kerala uses certified energy auditors, Telangana uses approved third-party assessors and Haryana relies on the architect’s self-declaration. It adds that no penalties have been levied for non-compliance “except for holding up the completion certificates”.[2] Two states tie the code to a document the owner needs anyway. In Telangana, building operations certificates are linked to ECBC approval, and in Madhya Pradesh permanent electricity connection depends on compliance.[2]
The numbers show how uneven the result is. ETPI reports that no state has published data on ECBC-compliant buildings, and that the Bureau reported about 3,400 such buildings across the country at different stages of construction as of FY 2024, with Andhra Pradesh at 766 and Telangana at 481 the highest.[3] ETPI gives that Bureau total as 3,413 in one place and 3,414 in another, so we round it.
The code itself asks for metering that a BMS can use, but the commissioning step is voluntary
ECSBC 2024 contains its own evidence trail. Its check-metering section calls for meters at the building mains that monitor energy use in kWh, kVARh and kVAh, demand in kW or kVA, and harmonic distortion on a half-hourly basis. Services of 1,000 kVA and above need permanent metering of demand, energy and power factor half-hourly. Sub-meters must be Class 1s or better with an RS-485 port and Modbus protocol.[1] Its commissioning appendix applies to buildings above 5,000 square metres of built-up area and says the building shall have a building management system that brings power and water consumption to a common dashboard. The same appendix states that its provisions are voluntary.[1]
This is where we draw a conclusion that is ours and not the code’s. A state that wants the operational evidence Kerala asks for needs buildings with half-hourly, sub-metered data that someone can export. A building with a working integrated BMS is better placed to supply it than one without. Whether a given state will accept such data, and in what form, is not something we found in the Kerala rules, and a project should ask the State Designated Agency. For the wider question of how smart a building is in practice, see How Smart Is Your Building?.
Questions to settle before relying on ECSBC 2024 for a project
- Has the state notified the code, and which edition applies to this project?
- At which step must compliance be shown: plan sanction, completion, occupancy or electricity connection?
- Who certifies the design, and is that person empanelled or approved by the state?
- Does the state ask for post-occupancy reports, and in what form?
- What metering and data export will the building need to produce them?
What we could not confirm
Andhra Pradesh. We read The Hindu, The New Indian Express and a summary, and not the order. The Express text we read does not mention ECSBC by name. Kerala’s edition. The definition does not name 2024. Other states. We did not survey states beyond those named in NITI, ETPI and the two orders, so other states may have acted since February 2026.
Trisim’s view: a code only binds through the document a building cannot do without
Trisim’s view is that the useful question about any building code is which document the owner cannot proceed without, whether that is the plan sanction, the occupancy certificate or the power connection. Where that link exists, the rest of the chain gets built around it. Where it does not, the code stays advice. This is an opinion about enforcement design and makes no claim about any Trisim project.
Need 3D models, BIM or a digital twin of your buildings? Talk to aigence Technologies.
Sources
- Bureau of Energy Efficiency, Energy Conservation and Sustainable Building Code 2024 (for Commercial and Office Buildings), 2024
- NITI Aayog, Scenarios Towards Viksit Bharat and Net Zero, Sectoral Insights: Buildings (Vol. 5), February 2026
- Energy Transition Preparedness Initiative (ETPI), The Buildings Sector: A Study on Energy Transition Preparedness in Ten Indian States (2023-24), February 2026
- Government of Kerala (Energy Management Centre-Kerala copy), Kerala Energy Conservation and Sustainable Building Code Rules, 2025, G.O.(P) No. 5/2025/Power, S.R.O. No. 374/2025, 10 March 2025
- The Hindu, Kerala govt. notifies Energy Conservation and Sustainable Building Code Rules, April 2025
- The Hindu, Andhra Pradesh notifies sweeping amendments to building rules, 20 December 2025
- The New Indian Express, Andhra govt notifies amendments to building rules, 21 December 2025
- TeamLease RegTech (legal-update summary), Govt of AP issued the amendments to the Andhra Pradesh Building Rules, December 2025